Author Topic: Carrick-like mats as stable, fixed eyeknots  (Read 458 times)

Kost_Greg

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 295
Carrick-like mats as stable, fixed eyeknots
« on: March 07, 2022, 08:02:05 PM »
This eyeknot was recently shown to me by Andreas, stimulating my interest.

I acknowledge it as a Carrick product, from the way it is formed, where instead of going the Carrick pathway after capturing the SP, an alternate/opposite routing is chosen, as shown by the arrows in first image.

The second Xarax's image, illustrates the complete Carrick mat, who had also depicted this interesting dressing state with his yellow rope, in the old days.

While it does not feature the Carrick symmetry, it is very stable, in the sense that it does not need to self dress in order to process the load, as conventional Carrick does (just locks in this very form without deforming), plus it is tiable in the bight.

But is there a copy of it in Ashley's?

Well, not exactly in this form i suppose, but if we BTL ( bia-axially through load) the knot, we get Abok 1054 farmer's loop.

I can't say that i have grown fond of Ashley's TIB tying method, but i definitely like this end of line, tugboat style, profile.

For a more EEL, crossing knot based, end termination profile, one has to flip the near the eye collar, in order to get Xarax's plait loop https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=5288.0.

Moreover, loading it from the returning eye leg, (which is now designated to be the SPart, the other eye leg as the tug end, and the two ends  are connected to form the eye of the new structure), a TIB cowboy bowline profile is formed, with its tail tucked and secured down through the gap between the SP and the returning eye leg (third image).
Going knots

Kost_Greg

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 295
Re: Carrick-like mats as stable, fixed eyeknots
« Reply #1 on: March 18, 2022, 03:51:17 PM »
I keep on staying a little more on the TIB level, with another interesting, TIB, Eskimo/Carrick - like dressing state, that i have picked up from the previous original's post configuration, by changing the load pathway (first image).

Loading the knot like this, would probably lead to the second image crossing knot based formation, where the tug end instead of being tucked under SP for an asymmetrical Carrick structure, it follows the SP down through the collar to meet the tibness.

Another decent option is to Cap the initial mat scheme (or the second knot), which is to flip the collar around SP (or around the two ends), and encircle both eye legs.

The result of the Cap operation is given in third image, in a rather more clean, crossing knot component, entanglement.

The returning eye leg carvature (bight), that restrains the tug end, might be pulled inside the nub, by swapping the two eye legs, for the fourth image "tugboat" tresse.

The last two knots are probably pointing to an inline profile, as farmer's variations, but still presented as tugboat end of line structures.

Afterall, combining two crossing knot components, might produce an explosive mixture of potential distortion at extreme loadings, so it would be good to discriminate the more stable forms.

Not sure if these combinations have been recorded before, the crossing knot investigators might want to weigh in.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2022, 05:57:57 PM by Kost_Greg »
Going knots

Kost_Greg

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 295
Re: Carrick-like mats as stable, fixed eyeknots
« Reply #2 on: March 22, 2022, 05:43:32 PM »
To continue somewhat differently, i''ll start from the most stable of the Carrick forms, a #1439 derived eyeknot, and try to build on this structure and see if i can develop similar function knots.

The first step is to make it tiable in the bight, and one way to do it is as follows ......

1. Tie a #1439 Carrick mat and load it to form the conventional entangled crossing knot scheme.

2. Change the state of the returning crossing knot by pulling WE  (the two states shown in the first two images).

3. Tuck the tug end back through the nipping collar ( third image).

4. Fourth image, is a dressing of tucking WE back through the collar, directly from the first image structure.

The third profile, derived from the first three steps, is more appropriate for this loading option, because the returning crossing knot collar, is under SP's continuous constriction, while in fourth profile, the returning crossing knot strain, has the tedency to push the tail out of its collar. I think it would be a better choice to load it in reverse, from the tail side, as a Samisen bowline, to avoid this type of distortion.
Going knots

 

anything